. N 7., FEB. 1C. '56.]
NOTES AND QUERIES.
127
tions ever made, has its peculiar zest in the fact
of the proposition denied belonging to physical
science, being capable of demonstration, and
having since actually received demonstration satis-
factory to the very successors of the Inquisitors
who denied it. Without at all wishing to deprive
this singular case of its pre-eminence, it strikes
me that a very amusing as well as instructive list
might be made of propositions now universally
admitted, but formerly condemned by those who
had authority to pronounce. I think this list
might be picked out of all denominations in the
seventeenth century, whether called church or sect,
and the pot-and-kettle nature of the results would
make them useful knowledge to the over zealous
of our day, whether in church or sect, as before.
The instance I shall produce, is a decision of the University of Oxford in 1622, six years after the decision of the Inquisitors, and eleven years before its practical" application to Galileo's second offence. The account is given in Wood's Historia, &c. (pp. 326-328.). One William Knight had promulgated certain opinions on the rights of subjects, seditious enough in their intent, and dis- respectful enough in their insinuations as to what kings might, could, and perhaps would be guilty of. But the University, not satisfied with com- mitting Knight to prison, where many persons had been before him for much less audacious supposi- tions, collected certain of his theses, and summoned a convocation to condemn them, as being, so says Wood, against Scripture, Councils, Fathers, the Primitive Church, and the safety of the Monarchy. One of these propositions runs as follows, and the Censura is appended. It passed, according to Wood, unanimously.
"Subditis mere privatis, si Tyrannus tanquam latro aut stuprator in ipsos faciat impetum, et ipsi nee potes- tatem ordinariam implorare, nee alia ralione effugere periculum possint, in prasenti periculo se et suos contra Tyrannum, sicut contra privatum Grassatorem, defendere licet.
" Censura. Haec propositio est falsa, periculosa, impia."
It was enacted that all persons presenting them- selves for degrees should subscribe these censures, and make oath that they would neither hold, teach, nor defend the opinions therein con- demned.
Conceding periculosa as applicable in the cur- rent time to the enunciation of the proposition, and seditiosa to its intention, it will strike many that the epithets falsa and impia put the declara- tion of the University almost on a par with that of the Inquisitors. For myself, I would rather condemn the earth's motion ten times over, than affirm, with the Convocation of 1622, that Famines se contra regem stupratorem, sicut contra privatum, defendere non licet: and this proposition the Uni- versity compelled young graduates to swear to, or, which is much the same thing, they compelled
them to swear that the contradiction of it was
false.
To the proposition that the bishop might ex- communicate the civil magistrate, the convocation applied only the milder erronea, and not the strong falsa. The words were always significa- tive of difference in degree ; thus the Inquisitors qualify the earth's motion as falsa in philosophia et ad minus erronea in fide. It is curious that the University should have been more sure that a woman has no right to defend herself against a king than that a bishop has no right to excom- municate the king. It is curious that the In- quisitors should have been more sure of the physical falsehood of the earth's motion than of the heresy of the doctrine. It is curious that no Protestant should have remembered 1622, while twitting the Papist with 1G33. It is curious that no Roman Catholic should have happened to light upon the Oxford decision, for retort upon the heretic. It is all curious together. M.
ILLUSTRATIONS OF MACAULAY.
Schomberg 1 s Monument. In speaking of the great Duke of Schomberg, in vol. iii. p. 638., Mr. Macaulay informs us that his corpse, to which " every honour was paid," was deposited with funeral pomp in Westminster Abbey ! This ill accords with what is well known, as stated by Mason in his History of St. Patrick's Cathedral, Dublin, notes, p. 50. :
" Near to the monument of Archbishop Jones, there is a large slab of black marble, fixed high in the wall, with an inscription thereon, to the memory of the renowned Frederic, Duke Schomberg. The remains of this great general were removed to this cathedral immediately after the battle of the Boyne, where they lay until the 10th of July, and were then deposited under the altar ; the inter- ment of Duke Schomberg is noted with a pencil in the register; the entry is almost illegible, insomuch that it has been often sought for in vain. Although he well merited from the gratitude of a country in whose cause he fell, and the favour of a prince whom he faithfully served, such a testimonial, no memorial of the place of his interment was erected until the year 1731."
Dean Swift was actuated by a just indignation towards the relatives of this great man, who, though they derived all their wealth and honours from him, neglected to pay the smallest tribute of respect to his remains ; and after many fruitless applications made by him and the chapter of his cathedral, " postquam per epistolas, per amicos, diu ac ssepe orando nil proficere," caused the present slab to be erected, and himself dictated the inscription, which is given by Mr. Mason, and is, as one might expect, of rather a caustic cha- racter.* For interesting letters upon the subject,
[* The inscription is given in "N. & Q.," 1 st S. vii. 341. See also p. 13. of the same volume.]
